Monthly Stats

[Stagger]

Following my pacemaker opp, I decided to work on monthly stats and predominantly ascents.
A young Lindsey Buck completed 50odd Scafell ascents last year and same of Kirkfell the year before. She is now a top ascender around my level.
With that in mind I've checked January 2016 and have covered 45.5miles with climb of 13800ft.
Just over 300ft/mile.
Do others log ascents per mile and if so how do you compare?

[Dave_Mole]

I like to keep an eye on the elevation, but log it in km/m.
This month was 190km and 6,805m so 118 miles and 22,326ft = 189 ft/mile.

[Travs]

Don't strictly log distance/ascent with a watch, as 90% of my work is in the gym. I am regularly hitting about 12-15000ft of ascent a week. However as I find out every time I race, it doesn't necessarily translate to 'the real thing..."

Unfortunately it's the best I can manage in my location, so hoping one day it will all come good (I bloody well hope so, I'm pretty much devoting all my time outside of work to improving)

[Ally]

When looking at my training logs it goes time>vert>mileage, though obviously all three are taken together to give an overall picture. i.e. Shitty weather weeks vert will be lower, mileage higher as I've stayed low down.

January was ~403k and 19k, so 47m/km or 250odd ft/mile(that conversion did my head in). Less mileage but more vert than last January so I'm fairly pleased.

[Corniceman]

An interesting concentration on ascent here in training. When I had my best years racing 2012/2013 before injury it was off far less emphasis on ascent and much more on running flat(tish) miles hard and fast. my min per mile speed then was 50 or so seconds faster than it is now and it shows in my race times and positions. Focus was on mile intervals, 2 mile intervals and tempo runs coupled with races and the odd day out at weekends on the hill a I was certainly fitter and faster then than at anytime since. And despite the lack of weekly based ascent, going up was my strength then, which I put down to leg speed and a well developed aerobic system. I didn't even do 10,000 feet a week before doing 'big rounds' but would agree that ascent and descent training in a considerable amount is a key part of successfully achieving day long challenges, long fell races but not so much the short and fast races of The Peak or Yorks.

[Latege]

I've been thinking of doing this recently (mainly to see how little ascent I get in my current location compared to previously). Now I'm wondering where you gather your stats. and how accuate you think they are. I've just tried to look mine up for Jan. SportsTracks tells me 8,378ft over 134miles so only 62ft/mile. Garmin Connect Reports page only finds 13 activities (there are actually 19) but nonetheless records 8,281ft but only over 95miles so 85ft/mle. Still not much but now I'm discouraged from even logging it because i've no idea which is closer to reality and 20ft/mile, i.e. over 2,000ft/month is quite a difference.

[Stolly]

My stats for the year so far are 219 miles with 35,500 ft of ascent. So thats 162 ft per mile

[Ally]

When I had my best years racing 2012/2013 before injury it was off far less emphasis on ascent and much more on running flat(tish) miles hard and fast.

This is intriguing. Was it the flat(ish)ness that made you faster or the intensity? I've increased the intensity a fair bit this winter, a mix of uphill only stuff and bits and pieces on the flat(ish). Definitely feel I'm climbing more strongly but the flatter running feels really good for opening up the hips.

[barnyc]

An interesting concentration on ascent here in training. When I had my best years racing 2012/2013 before injury it was off far less emphasis on ascent and much more on running flat(tish) miles hard and fast. my min per mile speed then was 50 or so seconds faster than it is now and it shows in my race times and positions. Focus was on mile intervals, 2 mile intervals and tempo runs coupled with races and the odd day out at weekends on the hill a I was certainly fitter and faster then than at anytime since. And despite the lack of weekly based ascent, going up was my strength then, which I put down to leg speed and a well developed aerobic system. I didn't even do 10,000 feet a week before doing 'big rounds' but would agree that ascent and descent training in a considerable amount is a key part of successfully achieving day long challenges, long fell races but not so much the short and fast races of The Peak or Yorks.

I know a lad whose core running is predicated on a fast and flat 6 mile run to work, around 6 minutes/mile pace, 4 or 5 days a week. He does a weekly fell run of between 6-12 miles; this training base sees him in the top 10% of most fell races, with a bit of specific training in the week or 2 leading up to a big Lakeland race. There's a lot to be said for leg strength as a by-product of speed training.

[Corniceman]

This is intriguing. Was it the flat(ish)ness that made you faster or the intensity? I've increased the intensity a fair bit this winter, a mix of uphill only stuff and bits and pieces on the flat(ish). Definitely feel I'm climbing more strongly but the flatter running feels really good for opening up the hips.

That's difficult to say because I live in Nottingham which is relatively flat. I guess if I lived in a hillier area, I might do shorter and more intense speed work in that hillier environment. What I am thinking though is that climbing hills in training is not the be all and end all for successful fell racing. A couple of years ago I did the Welsh 3000' peaks with two local marathon runners, whose experience of big hill climbing was limited. however both were 2:30 marathon runners and train 80 miles plus per week, mainly flat and fast. Both were stronger than me on the climbs up Elidir and Penyrolewenwen. Also I have noted how well people like X/C and Marathon specialists Steve Vernon and Andi Jones do in fell races on the rare occasions they run them. using their speed and strength as well as their well developed aerobic and anaerobic systems to advantage.